Increases in Genetic Information

Define nuclear contamination, please.Because it appears that this is a point of simple denial on your part. A mutation is simply an inheritable change in a genome of an organism. In multi-celled animals the change has to be a part of the reproductive cells to be inheritable, but it is certainly appropriate to call such a change in a lung cell a mutation if it affects new lung cells.So exactly what is it that you consider to be a misuse of the term mutation? What constitutes nuclear contamination? This 'never known before now' stuff is complete nonsense. As long as the change was not a part of any of the ancestors of say a raven, why would it be important that the genetic sequence was known before in some other, non ancestural animal, such as a penguin. In my opinion, this 'requirement' is simply to allow disallowing some mutations that simply augment a currently known behavior. More simple denial.You seem to want mutant to mean the cartoon version of mutant as applied to the X-men.

How would the not turning off of genes get passed on to offspring?

Completely wrong. You are equivocating on the term fitness.Fitness, in the sense relevant to evolution means the ability to survive to sire/bear offspring that also survive to reproduce. Living past 50 or so contributes a relatively small amount to any of that. Accordingly natural selection has a lesser impact on things that don't affect longevity during child bearing and child rearing. How could it be otherwise? Also note that treatment allows those with sickle cell to survive past 80. See
Sickle cell disease - Wikipedia

quote:

---

Life expectancy is shortened. In 1994, in the US, the average life expectancy of persons with this condition was estimated to be 42 years in males and 48 years in females,[1] but today, thanks to better management of the disease, patients can live into their 80s or beyond

---

On the other hand malaria kills young folks. 85% of the malaria deaths today are of children under five. See
http://www.afro.who.int/...0-facts-on-malaria-in-africa.html.Given those facts, we don't expect sickle cell anemia to be eliminated by selection in a short period of time even in malaria free countries. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

You mean times of famine AND plague right? Vitamin C doesn't fight hunger. But in times of famine aren't there more immediate concerns than Vitamin C deficiency?

Ignoring the typo (a 'C' was lost, not an 'H'), I think you are conceding a bit too much here by proposing that something was lost. I don't read the following as saying a letter was lost, but rather that a letter was changed, e.g an R in chair to an 'N':From the article...

quote:

---

Point mutations in the sodium channels, termed the kdr mutations, reduce or eliminate the binding affinity of insecticides to sodium channels causing insecticide resistance6.

---

The point mutation did not remove a site; the mutation changed a site from binding to non binding for pyrethroid insecticides. The site did not get destroyed, it was reconfigured. And Who knows what new molecule can bind at the reconfigured site? And what did the site do originally? Total BS from someone motivated not to see the unavoidable. Nothing like the above is described in the article.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.